1. Field of the Invention
This invention pertains generally to electrical communications, and more particularly to condition responsive indicating systems with radio link and including personal portable device for tracking location. The condition responsive indicating systems of the present invention monitor the specific condition of humans or animals. In one preferred manifestation, a fully self-contained collar designed in accord with the teachings of the present invention monitors the location of a pet such as a dog, and provides well-defined and primarily positive stimulus to train the pet to stay within a predetermined area.
2. Description of the Related Art
Dogs are well-known as “man's best friend” owing to the many beneficial services that they provide. However, and likely since mankind first befriended dogs, there has existed a need to control the territory that a dog has access to. There are many reasons that motivate this need, many which may be relatively unique to a particular dog or owner and others that are far more universal.
Irrespective of the reason, there have been limited ways to exert this control over a dog. One method is a fixed containment structure such as a fence or building. As may be apparent, such structures are typically expensive and time consuming to install, and necessarily static in location. In other words, they are only useful at the location where they are constructed, and so are of no value when a pet and owner travel. Furthermore, these static structures often interfere in other ways with other activities of the dog owner, such as with lawn care or interfering with the owner's movement about a property. In addition, the dog may find ways to bypass the structure, such as by digging under a fence or slipping through a not-quite completely secured gate.
A second approach to controlling accessible territory is through a combination collar and leash or similar restraint. The leash is anchored to a fixed point, or in the best of situations, to a line or cable along which the dog can travel. Unfortunately, most dogs are notoriously bad at untangling or unwrapping a leash from a fixed object. Consequently, dogs tend to tangle the leash about trees, posts and other objects, and can become completely unable to move. If the owner is not aware that the dog has become tangled, this can lead to dangerous situations in cases such as extreme weather or when the dog has been left unattended for an extended period.
Additionally, some dogs are very good at escaping the leash, such as by backing away from the leash and using the leash force to slip off the collar, or by chewing through the leash. Once again, if the owner is unaware, the dog may travel from the desired area into other unsuitable areas such as roadways and the like. This may put both dog and humans in jeopardy, such as when a vehicle swerves to avoid the dog or when a dog has a temperament not suited to the general human population.
The leash also necessarily defines the region in which the dog may travel. For exemplary purposes, with a ground stake and a leash the dog is constrained to a circle. In this example, the owner will typically define the circle to the smallest radius that the dog may desirably travel within. As can be understood, for all but circularly limited areas, this leads to a great deal of space that the dog cannot access, but which would otherwise be suitable for the dog.
In consideration of the limitations of static structures and leashes, various artisans have proposed vary beneficial further techniques that provide more flexibility and capability, such as buried or above ground transmitter antennas and radio collars that either detect the crossing of a buried line or detect the reception or absence of reception of a signal broadcast by the transmitter antenna. These systems remove the physical link between dog and a static structure, meaning the dog will not get tangled in obstacles when moving about. Further, in the case of a buried line, the line may follow any geometry of land, and so is not limited to a circular pattern limited by a particular radius.
Unfortunately, burying a line can be difficult or impossible if there are other objects, such as irrigation systems, buried utility lines, landscaping, hard surfaces, trees, or other fixed objects. Additionally, current soil conditions such as frozen soil or snow covered ground in the winter may also limit the ability to bury the line. Radio systems are also well known to be significantly affected by static and other forms of Electro-Magnetic Interference or Radio-Frequency Interference (EMI-RFI). Consequently, a dog may be shocked or otherwise punished without basis or appropriate reason. As is known in the field of psychology, this random punishment can literally destroy the training of a dog, and may lead to erratic or wanton misbehavior. This problem is also very location dependent, meaning that there are places where there is so much EMI-RFI that a radio system is completely unusable. As a result of the inability to completely eliminate or substantially eradicate the effects of EMI-RFI, the use of these radio systems is far from universal. Instead, many dog owners continue to rely upon static structures or leashes to control the territory accessible by their dog.
With the advent and substantial advancement of Global Positioning Systems (GPS), presently primarily used for navigation, artisans have recognized the opportunity to incorporate GPS technology into pet containment. Several systems have been proposed in the literature for decades, but these systems have not as yet become commercially viable.
One significant limitation of prior art GPS systems is the accuracy of the system. Accuracy can be dependent upon variables such as atmospheric variations, signal reflections and signal loss due to obstacles, and variability intentionally introduced into the system. Similar variability is found in various radio and cellular locating systems.
A GPS or similar navigation system that is accurate to plus or minus ten meters is very adequate for navigational purposes, for example to guide a person to a commercial building for a meeting or for other commerce. However, for pet containment this level of accuracy is completely unacceptable. For exemplary purposes, many residential yards are forty feet wide, or approximately 10 meters. A system that is only accurate to plus or minus ten meters might try to locate the dog in either neighbor's yard, depending upon the system on any given day.
Another limitation is the amount of calculation required to determine whether the pet is within a selected area of containment. Prior art GPS systems use nodes to define the perimeter, and then mathematically calculate where the pet is relative to the nodes. Unfortunately, this requires a substantial amount of computation, which increases greatly as the number of nodes are increased. As a result, these systems commonly rely upon a primary processing system that is remote from the dog, to which the dog's collar is coupled via radio waves or the like. This permits the primary processing system to perform calculations and then relay results or control signals back to the collar. Undesirably, this also adds complexity, drains precious battery power limiting the usable collar time, and again makes the containment system dependent upon conventional radio communications systems. In addition, the need for both the collar and a secondary base station makes the system far less portable. This means, for example, that taking the dog from home to a park is impractical.
A further limitation of the prior art is battery life. A collar that must be removed and recharged every few hours is unacceptable for most purposes. Unfortunately, the intensive computations required by prior art systems either requires a fast and consequently higher power processor unit, or a communications link such as a radio link to a base station. While the collar unit may transmit data back to the base unit to avoid the need for complex computational ability, even the transmission of position information and reception of collar actions requires a reasonably powered radio. It will be apparent that walkie-talkies, cell phones and other hand-held radio devices all have very large batteries to provide adequate transmission and reception life, and yet these devices often only support several hours of communications. As can be appreciated, size and weight are severely restricted for a device fully self-contained on a dog's collar, and the inclusion of a large battery is undesirable.
The following patents and published patent applications are believed to be exemplary of the most relevant prior art, and the teachings and contents of each are incorporated herein by reference: U.S. Pat. No. 4,393,448 by Dunn et al, entitled “Navigational plotting system”; U.S. Pat. No. 4,590,569 by Rogoff et al, entitled “Navigation system including an integrated electronic chart display”; U.S. Pat. No. 4,611,209 by Lemelson et al, entitled “Navigation warning system and method”; U.S. Pat. No. 4,817,000 by Eberhardt, entitled “Automatic guided vehicle system”; U.S. Pat. No. 4,999,782 by BeVan, entitled “Fixed curved path waypoint transition for aircraft”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,067,441 by Weinstein, entitled “Electronic assembly for restricting animals to defined areas”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,191,341 by Gouard et al, entitled “System for sea navigation or traffic control/assistance”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,351,653 by Marischen et al, entitled “Animal training method using positive and negative audio stimuli”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,353,744 by Custer, entitled “Animal control apparatus”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,355,511 by Hatano et al, entitled “Position monitoring for communicable and uncommunicable mobile stations”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,381,129 by Boardman, entitled “Wireless pet containment system”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,389,934 by Kass, entitled “Portable locating system”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,408,956 by Quigley, entitled “Method and apparatus for controlling animals with electronic fencing”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,450,329 by Tanner, entitled “Vehicle location method and system”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,568,119 by Schipper et al, entitled “Arrestee monitoring with variable site boundaries”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,587,904 by Ben-Yair et al, entitled “Air combat monitoring system and methods and apparatus useful therefor”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,594,425 by Ladner et al, entitled “Locator device”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,751,612 by Donovan et al, entitled “System and method for accurate and efficient geodetic database retrieval”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,791,294 by Manning, entitled “Position and physiological data monitoring and control system for animal herding”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,857,433 by Files, entitled “Animal training and tracking device having global positioning satellite unit”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,868,100 by Marsh, entitled “Fenceless animal control system using GPS location information”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,911,199 by Farkas et al, entitled “Pressure sensitive animal training device”; U.S. Pat. No. 5,949,350 by Girard et al, entitled “Location method and apparatus”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,043,748 by Touchton et al, entitled “Satellite relay collar and programmable electronic boundary system for the containment of animals”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,114,957 by Westrick et al, entitled “Pet locator system”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,172,640 by Durst et al, entitled “Pet locator”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,232,880 by Anderson et al, entitled “Animal control system using global positioning and instrumental animal conditioning”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,232,916 by Grillo et al, entitled “GPS restraint system and method for confining a subject within a defined area”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,236,358 by Durst et al, entitled “Mobile object locator”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,263,836 by Hollis, entitled “Dog behavior monitoring and training apparatus”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,271,757 by Touchton et al, entitled “Satellite animal containment system with programmable Boundaries”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,313,791 by Klanke, entitled “Automotive GPS control system”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,421,001 by Durst et al, entitled “Object locator”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,441,778 by Durst et al, entitled “Pet locator”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,480,147 by Durst et al, entitled “Portable position determining device”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,487,992 by Hollis, entitled “Dog behavior monitoring and training apparatus”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,518,919 by Durst et al, entitled “Mobile object locator”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,561,137 by Oakman, entitled “Portable electronic multi-sensory animal containment and tracking device”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,581,546 by Dalland et al, entitled “Animal containment system having a dynamically changing perimeter”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,700,492 by Touchton et al, entitled “Satellite animal containment system with programmable boundaries”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,748,902 by Boesch et al, entitled “System and method for training of animals”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,903,682 by Maddox, entitled “DGPS animal containment system”; U.S. Pat. No. 6,923,146 by Kobitz et al, entitled “Method and apparatus for training and for constraining a subject to a specific area”; U.S. Pat. No. 7,034,695 by Troxler, entitled “Large area position/proximity correction device with alarms using (D)GPS technology”; U.S. Pat. No. 7,259,718 by Patterson et al, entitled “Apparatus and method for keeping pets in a defined boundary having exclusion areas”; U.S. Pat. No. 7,328,671 by Kates, entitled “System and method for computer-controlled animal toy”; U.S. Pat. No. 7,677,204 by James, entitled “Dog training device”; U.S. Pat. No. 8,155,871 by Lohi et al, entitled “Method, device, device arrangement and computer program for tracking a moving object”; 2007/0204804 by Swanson et al, entitled “GPS pet containment system and method”; and 2008/0252527 by Garcia, entitled “Method and apparatus for acquiring local position and overlaying information”; and EP0699330 and WO 94/27268 by Taylor, entitled “GPS Explorer”.
In addition to the foregoing, Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition copyright 1983, is incorporated herein by reference in entirety for the definitions of words and terms used herein.